ANAND DILIPBHAI PATOLE Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant accused seeks to challenge the impugned order dtd. 17/9/2022 passed below Exhs:51 and 56 in Special POCSO Case No.182/2018 by learned Special Judge (POCSO) and 7 th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to file present petition are that the applicant is facing trial of rape case. On 3/4/2019, charges were framed by the Court concerned. During the course of trial proceedings, on 15/9/2022, the Court had examined two witnesses and the next date was fixed on 17/9/2022 for recording the deposition of the complainant respondent No.2, who is the victim of the case. Admitedly, the victim settled at Australia. The arrangement for recording the deposition was made virtually through Zoom Application by the court concerned. Before the date i.e. 17/9/2022, the counsel for the applicant accused tendered one application Exh:49, requesting the Court to change the date as he was having some personal difficulty. The Court concerned did not grant the permission to change the date and rejected the application. On 17/9/2022 vide Exh:50, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted adjournment application which also came to be rejected by the Court and deposition of the victim was recorded. After completion of examination, the request for adjournment was not acceded to by the Court concerned and the application Exh:56 was turned down and right to cross-examine the victim was closed by the Court. In the aforesaid facts, the applicant has preferred this petition to set aside the impugned orders passed below Exh:50 and 56.

(3.) This Court has heard learned counsel Mr. Kirtan Mistry for Mr.S.A.Shukla, for the applicant and Ms. Krina Calla, learned APP on advance copy.